Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
rate today is higher than that of frugal canada. a new congressional budget office report says deficits are returning to precrisis levels within a few years. we don't need some big and grand bargain. even moderate reform on immigration, gun control, energy policy, and most difficult, the budget, would give a powerful boost to the country beyond any specific economic impact. you see, politicians could demonstrate that they could actually govern. everyone would get some credit. and america would finally have found a center. for more on this, you can red read my column in this week's "time" magazine. let's get started. >>> so now you know my thoughts on how the white house and congress can get some work done. let's get straight to what other people think. joining me today, paul krugman, op-ed columnist for "the new york times," the author of "end this depression now" just out in paper back and on "the new york times" bestseller list. mort zuckerman, publisher of u.s. news and world report, publisher of "the daily news" and he has a few real estate holdings here and there. arianna huffingto
that john boehner said about how we have handled deficits over the years. let's listen to this. >> at some point, washington has to deal with its spending problem. now, i've watched them kick this can down the road 22 years that i've been here. i've had enough of it. it's time to act. >> that is -- i'm trying to think of a word other than lie. kick the can down the road? we had a big tax increase in 1993 with president clinton along with big spending cuts. >> right. >> it was a deficit reduction package that worked. they continued to do more deficit reducing package with newt gingrich on the spending side throughout the decade and we're on our way to a surplus. >> that's right. i've been calling it the undecade, the 1990s has been written out of their record. they would have you believe that it was always the way it was under reagan and then bush. >> why don't they just say, leave off the clinton tax increase, which helped a lot, and just claim they did it for spending cuts? >> because if they do, if they admit that something nice happened in the '90s, they have to say, what happened after
this debt problem. [applause] if you look at what is happening here, it is true that the deficit are going to be below $1 trillion for the first time in several years. and it is true that the new revenues raised in spending that you did not do. it is true that the economy is beginning to grow again. but this is almost like the reverse of what we did in 1993. that is, i was prickly well aware if we raise taxes and cut spending, it could have a dragging effect in the economy. but not nearly as much as spending 40% of the budget paying interest on the debt. not nearly as much as having low growth. at nearly as much as having interest rates that were too high. so our gamble was that the explosive the fact of lowering interest rates, with a booming bond market and having more disposable income over a 5 =-10 year period would more than offset putting the hammer down by raising more money and cutting spending. it turned out to be a good gamble, but it made sense. it will make sense here again. but timing is everything. and so, i think he should have a budget that does not defy our arithmetic but
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)